Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: "Dana Tweedy" <reddfrogg@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:23:53 GMT
<mccoy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1138041040.811147.206160@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
snipping
>> Why do you have this wierd idea that you know more about this subject
>> than the people who actually do it?
>
> Interestingly enough you are assuming that they are doing it.
No, it's not an assumption. The same forumlas are used for interplanetary
missions such as Voyager, and Pioneer. Are you saying those images sent
back by those spacecraft are faked?
> The fact
> of the matter is that all astronomers realize that they can say almost
> anything and get away with it.
The fact of the matter is that geunine scientists are not, as a whole, as
much a bunch of scoundrels as Creationists. These astronomers are by and
large, honest people who are working to the best of their ability.
Accusing them of making up distances, without the slightest bit of evidence
that this is so, is amazingly irresponsible and reprehensible, even for you.
> The fact being there is no way to
> actually verify said distance.
The fact is that the geometrical calculations verify the distances. Anyone
with half a brain can figure them out for his/her own self.
DJT
.
- References:
- What is a recessive gene?
- From: Gary Bohn
- Hawking and distance of stars
- From: mccoy
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: Dana Tweedy
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: mccoy
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: Dana Tweedy
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: mccoy
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: Richard Forrest
- Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- From: mccoy
- What is a recessive gene?
- Prev by Date: Re: The "church of Darwin" insult
- Next by Date: Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- Previous by thread: Re: Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- Next by thread: Re: Hawking and distance of stars
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|